Now Independent Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut flirted with voucher-style choice before deciding he wanted to become Al Gore's in 2000.  Joined by the very pro-charter Democrat Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and pro-voucher Republican Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Leiberman led a press conference on July 18 announcing their joint proposal for NCLB reauthorization, the All Students Can Succeed Act (ASCSA) of 2007.  With New York and D.C. Chancellors Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee at the Senators' sides, whoever set up the press conference seemed to be trying for an image suggesting a pro-public education political center.

On its merits, what the proposal doesn’t say as important as what it does. There’s nothing about 1) changing the basis for AYP to multiple measures; 2) dropping the goal of 100% student proficiency by 2014;  3) keeping Reading First;  or 4) dissatisfaction with SES. There is a commitment to 5) differentiated consequences for schools that don’t make AYP, depending on whether failure is widespread or confined to a small group; 6) more funding for schools in need of improvement; and 7) focusing choice and SES on the students failing to make AYP rather than everyone eligible for free or reduced lunch.

Elimination of the “any other” change option for schools in restructuring and prempting state law to break caps on charter schools are trades the school improvement industry - less SES providers - might well be happy to support in return for accepting point 7.  Far more important, the points around standards and accountability aren’t far from the Gregg-Barr plan. If a deal could be had between the two bills, the industry as a whole should be glad for it.

The presence of Governor Roy Barnes of the Aspen Institute's bipartisan Commission on No Child Left Behind identifies ASCSA's source. But not one of the Senators is a member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.  The implication is that the Commission found no backers among committee members. Yet three are running to secure the Democratic nomination for President and might find a ready-made, well-considered, broadly-based and detailed platform useful. Turning it down implies there's something wrong with ASCSA politically. That would be its centrist stance; not terribly helpful when Democratic candidates are striving to attract or keep union support and know there's no payoff to embracing the  accountabilty features of today's NCLB supported in the proposal.

One other thought. Whatever bill finally passes, expect differentiated consequences to be part of it. It's logical as a matter of policy, and politically advantageous in relieving local opposiition to NCLB I.  If AYP remains based on student test scores, your editor thinks the concept will be a good thing for the industry overall. Although it will shrink the SES market, it will also focus  money on the kids most in need of help, and administrators on the products, services and programs most likely to provide it. But if the idea is combined with multiple measures for accountability, the effects on the industry will be devastating, because the number of schools in need of improvement will drop precipitously. The latter scenario is a distinct possibility, and becomes more likely as we pass into and beyond the election.

(Hint: Someone in the trade groups ought to be doing the calculations on the relationship between legislative proposals and the size of the adressable market - or paying someone to do them.)

Key proposals from ASCSA's "detailed summary":

• Require and fund the development of state longitudinal data systems, with common data elements, to track student growth over time and to link student development to key items including teachers, programs and supplemental services….

• Provide flexibility for schools and districts that actually demonstrate effectiveness by allowing them to opt out of the Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) provisions….

• Require that Title I and non-Title I schools have an equitable distribution of non-Federal funds. States will perform a needs assessment to identify disproportionate funding….

• Grants for students in schools missing AYP for three or more consecutive years with no available alternative public school options, due to all the other schools failing to make AYP within the school district or a lack of room in other schools, to transfer to a public school outside of their district with the federal funds following the student….

• Enhance the Charter Schools Program to allow schools under restructuring to close and reopen themselves as charters, even if that would exceed a state cap on the number of charter schools….

• Schools with a majority of their students missing AYP will follow an intensive program of attention. Supplemental Education Services (SES) will be available in the second year under improvement, one year earlier than under the present law. Schools in the final year of restructuring, limited to no more than 10% of schools, as determined by the state, within a given district in a single year, will have similar options to those existing now except that the option for “any other major restructuring of the school's governance” is eliminated….

• Schools missing AYP due to one or more subgroups, but less than 50% of the student population, will go through a targeted attention program to address the problem areas. This program will include identification of specific actions to address the subgroups in need. SES and school transfers are still offered as options for economically disadvantaged students failing to make AYP….

• [S]cience will be added to the accountability system with all students to be proficient by the 2019-2020 school year with successful models of math and science partnerships expanded and replicated….

• Support increased peer-reviewed research and development on innovative approaches to education and ways to improve learning to allow states, districts, schools and students to better meet the goals of No Child Left Behind.